[56,0] THE FIFTY-SIXTH DISCOURSE : AGAMEMNON OR ON KINGSHIP.
(1) (Dion) Do you wish to hear words of practical wisdom 
on the subject of Agamemnon, words by which the 
mind can be improved, or does it annoy you to have 
Agamemnon son of Atreus named in my discussions ?
(Interlocuteur) Not even if you should speak of Adrastus 
son of Talaüs or of Tantalus or of Pelops, should 
I be annoyed, provided I am likely to be improved.
(Dion) Very well, I have just called to mind certain 
words which I might speak, if you would consent to 
answer when I question you.
(Interlocuteur) Proceed, for I will answer.
(2) (Dion) Are there certain persons who are rulers of 
men, just as there are some who are rulers of goats, 
others of swine, others of horses, others of cattle, 
there one and ail having in common the title herders ; 
or have you not read this verse of Cratinus ?
"My post is herder ; goats and kine I tend."
(Interlocuteur) I could not tell you whether it is better to call 
all who tend animals herders or not. 
(Dion) Not merely those who tend brute beasts, my
good fellow, but human beings too, if one should put 
any faith in Homer regarding these matters. But 
why did you not answer the original question ?
(Interlocuteur) What question ?
(Dion) Whether there are indeed certain rulers of men.
(Interlocuteur) Why, of course there are.
(3) (Dion) Who are these ? What do you call them ? I 
am not speaking of those who rule soldiers in war, for 
those who are leaders of the army as a whole we are 
wont to call generals ; just as also, considered unit by 
unit, the ruler of a company is called captain ; of 
a regiment, colonel ; of the fleet, admiral ; and of 
a single triereme, trierarch ; moreover, there are 
several others similarly named who in warfare exercise 
rule over small units, because at that time men 
need fullest care and leadership. (4) Nor, as it happens, 
am I asking what the leaders of the choruses are 
called, who give orders to the singers and set the 
tune, nor am I asking about the leaders of symposia, 
nor about any others who for a single act or for a set 
time assume a certain oversight and control over a 
group of men ; on the contrary, I mean rather those 
who at any time rule human  beings in their activities 
as citizens, or in their farming, it may be, or simply 
in their living, as Cyrus, for example, ruled the Persians, 
Deïoces  the Medes, Hellen those named for
him, Aeolus the Aeolians, Dorus the Dorians, Numa 
the Romans, and Dardanus the Phrygians.

[56,5] (Interlocuteur) Why, your question is not a hard one ; for all 
these whom you now name were called kings, and 
kings they were ; and this rule of which you speak, 
whereby a man exercises general control over human 
beings and gives them orders without being accountable 
to them, is called kingship.
(Dion) Then you do not regard as kingship the rule 
of the Heracleidae, who were kings in Lacedaemon 
for so long a time ?  For they did not do everything 
according to their own pleasure, but in many matters 
they were subject to the ephors, who, once this 
office had been established in Sparta in the reign 
of Theopompus, for their year of office had no 
less authority than the kings, insomuch that they 
wished to throw into prison even Pausanias son 
of Cleombrotus, the victor at Plataea, and when he 
had fled for refuge to the shrine of Athena, they 
killed him there, and it profited him nothing that he 
was of the line of the Heracleidae, or that he was 
guardian of a boy, or that he had been leader of all 
Hellas and not of Sparta alone. And later on, when 
Agesilaüs was at war with the Great King and had 
been victorious in battle in the neighbourhood of 
Sardis and had gained control over all lover Asia, the 
ephors sent a subordinate to summon him home ;
and Agesilaüs did not delay a single day, although 
he had gained authority over so many Greeks and so 
many barbarians. Was Agesilaüs, then, not king of 
Sparta, since he was subi cet to other rulers ?
(Interlocuteur) Why, how could these be kings in the strict 
sense of kingship ?
(8) (Dion) Will you, then, hold that not even Agamemnon 
was king of both Argives and Achaeans at Ilium, 
since he had an older man as supervisor of his rule, 
Nestor of Pylus ? Moreover, it was at that man's 
bidding that the wall about the ships was built and 
the trench dug about it as protection for the naval 
station, and at his direction too Agamemnon divided 
the army into detachments, though previously, as it 
would seem, it had fought without organization, both 
infantry and cavalry, all being mixed together in 
confusion, both Pylians and Argives and Arcadians 
and Boeotians. However, Nestor later bade him 
divide the army by tribes,
"That phratry may aid phratry and tribe aid tribe."
(9) "Moreover," said he, "in this way wilt thou recognize 
both the valorous and the cowardly among thy 
leaders"—but if among the leaders, obviously among 
the common soldiers too—and at the same time he 
explained the magnitude of the advantage that would 
result.
(Interlocuteur) And with what purpose did Nestor do this ?
(Dion) In order that even after Nestor's death Agamemnon 
might understand the art of generalship. 
But Agamemnon was so wholly obedient to Nestor 
that he not only did eagerly anything Nestor commanded 
in person, but even if in a dream he imagined 
that Nestor was saying sornething, he would not disregard 
that either. For instance, the dream about 
the battle deceived him in this way, because of its 
resemblance to Nestor.

[56,10] However, he was not only obedient to Nestor, who 
was deemed the wisest of the Achaeans, but also 
he would not attempt anything without the elders. 
For instance, when he was about to lead forth his 
army in obedience to the dream, he did not do so 
until the council of the elders had held a session by 
the ship of Nestor. Moreover, with regard to the 
test which he wished to make of the army, to see if it 
was willing to remain longer and fight it out despite 
the wrath of Achilles, he did not make the test in 
any other way before first consulting the council. 
On the other hand, most demagogues do not hesitate 
to bring before the popular assembly measures which 
have not been passed upon by the council. Yet 
Agamemnon conferred with the elders, and only 
then reported to the soldiery on the state of the war.
(11) (Interlocuteur) This is nothing strange, that, king though he 
was, he gave the others a chance to be heard and had 
an advisor who was trusted because of his years, 
though he himself had full authority in all matters. 
Else why did he act as he did in the matter of Briseïs 
instead of obeying the most noble Nestor ? 
(Dion) Why, it is just like the case of many men in 
private station who, not obeying their rulers or the 
laws, commit many unlawful acts, arts for which they
even have to submit to an accounting ; so when they 
are brought before the court they are subjected to 
whatever penalty they severally are thought to merit.
(Interlocuteur) Certainly.
(12) (Dion) Well then, does it not seem to you that Agamemnon, 
because he disobeyed on that occasion, 
was later called to account by Nestor ? I refer to 
the passage in which Nestor accuses him of that act 
in the presence of the wisest of the allies, the leaders 
themselves, adding what he was to suffer or to pay 
by way of penalty, a most grievous arraignment—for 
he was an able speaker—wherein he says he has long 
been troubled by Agamemnon's conduct :
"E'er since that day, oh son of Zeus, when thou 
Didst go and snatch Briseïs from the tent, 
Despite Achilles' rage, and not at all
As I was minded. Many words I spake
Against it ; yet to thy proud heart thou didst 
Submit, dishonouring the bravest man,
Whom e'en the gods had honoured ; for his prize 
Thou hast by seizure ; still let us plan e'en now."
(14) And, by the gods, he not only called him to account 
by his words but even laid upon him the heaviest 
penalty of all for his misconduct. For he bids him 
entreat Achilles and go to all lengths to persuade 
him. And Agamemnon, like men convicted in the 
courts, first makes a counter proposal of a fine, such 
as he says he is able to pay, as compensation for his 
insult ; then, among other things, he undertakes to 
offer sacrifice and to swear an oath regarding Briseïs, 

[56,15] that he has not even touched her since the day he 
took her from Achilles ; and in payment for merely
having removed her from one tent to another, he 
offers to give much gold, horses, tripods, cauldrons, 
women, and cities ; and finally, thinking this not 
enough, he offers Achilles whichever of his three 
daughters he may desire to have as wife.' Such a 
penalty no man had ever been condemned to undergo 
—in payment for a maidservant, and her a captive 
woman, although she had suffered no harm, to be 
forced to give his own daughter in marriage, together 
with a huge dower, and without any presents from 
the groom !  In truth we know of no suit involving a 
man in priva te station that has received a more bitter 
decision than this one.
(16) Does it seem to you, in Heaven's name, that Agamemnon 
ruled the Greeks without being subject to 
an accounting, and that he did not give very strict 
account for all he did ? Very well, let us drop our 
discussion of these matters just here, since they were 
deait with adequately yesterday, and let us turn to 
some other topic.
(Interlocuteur) Nay, by Heaven, relier try to say all you can 
upon the same topic, since I am now at last just 
beginning to understand the drift of your argument. 
For I imagine- you wish to discuss government or 
kingship or some such thing.